Amaleq13

Everyone needs to avoid personal attacks, inflammatory comments, and stick to offering substantive information relevant to the discussion.

Thanks in advance,

Amaleq13, BC&H moderator

Apikorus

My reading of Psalm 110 is that it is a royal enthronement psalm. Form critics have often suggested that it may have been recited on the accession of one or more Davidic kings.

The "Christological" reading of course makes a terrible mess out of it all. Masoretic tradition was clearly quite deliberate and correct in distinguishing adoni with a hiriq in verse 1 with adonai with a patach in verse 5. The former refers to the King of Judah and the latter to Yahweh.

While the appearance of Melchizedek in this psalm was important to Christians, I believe this is based on a misreading (which may not necessarily have been Christian in origin) of the difficult (and possibly corrupt) text of Ps 110:4. I don't think the character of Melchizedek from Genesis 14 appears at all in Ps 110. Rather, I think the plain sense of malki-tzedeq in 110:4 is literally "my king of righteousness" = "my righteous king." So I would translate 110:4 as

Yahweh has sworn, and will not change his mind. You are a priest forever; according to my words, my righteous king.

So now the character Melchizedek is out of the picture and the words are YHWH's words/promise to David, which has broad textual support. (al dibrati could just as well mean "according to my pact" or "according to my promise.")

I think Psalm 132, also supports my reading of malki-tzedeq = “righteous king� in Ps 110:4b. Clearly Ps 132 is redolent of enthronement terminology. Compare with Ps 132:11 nishba-yhwh l’dovid emet lo yashuv with Ps 110:4a nishba yhwh v’lo yinahem — the oath of the sovereign (nishba yhwh = “yhwh has sworn�). Also note the parallel mention of the priesthood.

As to why Ps 110:4 says, "you are a priest forever," it might be the case that the psalmist was justifying the royal arrogation of the priesthood, and attributing this to YHWH himself. Upon David's triumphant return with the ark to Jerusalem in 2 Samuel 6, David himself apparently conducts sacrifices -- a priestly duty. The Chronicler of course sanitizes this in 1 Chr 15:26, where Levites are invoked. But 2 Sam 6 clearly says that David conducted the sacrifice after those who had carried the ark had "stepped back six paces". Furthermore, David "was girded with a linen ephod" (2 Sam 6:14), which is a priestly garment. The clincher, though, is 2 Sam 8:18: uvnei dovid kohanim hayu - "and David's sons were priests".

Steven Avery

The Jewish Encyclopedia discusses Abarbanel's three volumes on Messiah

"Ma'yene ha-Yeshu'ah" (Sources of Salvation) - Daniel
"Yeshu'ot Meshi o" (The Salvation of His Anointed) - Talmud and Midrash
"Mashmia' Yeshu'ah" (Proclaiming Salvation) -

And those are more authoritative to you than Jewish translations (and the historic Christian BIble) that simply translates "thousands" ? Amazing.

The Greek OT is notoriously unreliable, often with multiple readings on the same verse. Noah, the Latin Vulgate is far more consequential as a translation aid, since Jerome translated it studying with Jews in Israel in 400 AD. And the Vulgate simply has millibus (thousands).

Please, Noah, simply logic here... New Orleans is few in number to be considered among the biggest cities of the USA ... Washington is few in number to support a baseball team (wait, did political pressure change that ?) Seattle is few in number to support a super-bowl winner.

You really do a lot of straining ... the gnats are getting anxious.

Ironically, the rabbinists become ultra-literalists. ONLY when trying to find fault with the New Testament. Sorta humorous, actually.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

Steven Avery

Ahh, that way you can throw out a nothing number, and then include every rent and expense, and every bagel in every oneg of a hundred thousand believers. Yep, that way you can get the $'s way up. And the Chassids are spending billions.

And that qualifies you to write the worst posts on the forum, simply rant after rant ?

If anyone else wants to discuss Psalm 110, or Isaiah 53:9 or other issues, I will try to oblige. As folks know, I close up conversation with various posters for a number of reasons, including moedbius strips circularity, tedious rants, and vulgarity. And your posts, Noah, are very deep into the rant category. Time is precious, and email and web forum time is to be used judiciously and properly.

Actually it is a simple, obviously accurate, and relatively kind truism.

Yep, and I have met and talked to many of the principles. As with Messianics, there is a great variation in quality, and quite a variation in integrity.

Your finishing information on Jews for Jesus looks reasonably accurate.

Shalom,
Steven

noah

Hey praxeus. I'll let you in on a little secret. We're not debating the term "thousands". We're debating whether Mathew misquotes Micah 5:2. The issue is clan vs. town. Good Luck!
Says you. Prove it. We don't have the originals. They're gone. Scholars don't agree on it. Why should I listen to you?
As you do, explain to me why the Septuagint is considered canonical in the Greek Orthodox Church and why the Eastern Orthodox Church uses LXX uses it to translate the Old Testament into other languages. Also explain to me why these Christian websites say it is accurate?
Here's a defence by the Christian Think Tank of the writers of the New Testament quoting the Septuagint.
This Christian website says the Septuagint "validates the accuracy of the original Hebrew Bible". Etc. Etc. Etc. So thank you praxeus but the Septuagint will do just nicely thank you. I'll take the Septuagint over a messianic any day.
You're not really going to argue that these are not real xians are you?
What a joke.

OK.

More projection praxeus? You should learn to internalize your insecurities and self-doubt.
If I were to put your posts on the the garbage vs. substance scale , it'd be headin on soouth for the substance and waayyy up north for the garbage. Just the odor is enough to....

Garbage unsubstantiated rhetoric. Prove it or move on.

noah

More garbage rhetoric. Do you honestly believe that the food budget of these groups (if they have one) composes a considerable majority of their overall campaign budgets? How about the media advertising campaigns? You know, ads, leaflets banners, billboards etc. etc. etc. Don't forget the cost of building those wonderful "Hebrew Christian Synagogues" and that's not all of course. So if you can come up with contrary figures, let's see 'em.

No. If you read my post, which I know you don't do, you will see that it qualifies me top draw a comparision between messianics, their tactics and the holocaust. But of course, since you mostly cherry pick my posts this will be of little interest to you. Nice debating methods.
Speaking of worst posts in the forum praxeus?

Actually no. You close up conversation with people who know the subject matter better than you as evidenced by <edit> explanation as to why you won't follow up on these issues with me. You started the mud-slinging paraxeus. If you can't handle it then get out of the mud-slinging business but don't start it, then use it as a smokescreen to get out of a debate which you know you can't win. <edit>

Really? Then you should be able to prove it. So....let's see the proof. You know, put up or shut up.

More of the same baseless, warmed over slop. I guess you don't get it praxeus. Repeating unsubstantiated garbage doesn't prove it. You have to show me why and how you are correct. It's getting boring challenging you to prove your empty assertions praxeus.

Actually, it was right on. It was completely accurate. Nice try Mr. messianic.

noah

One other thing praxeus. I noticed in your cherry picking you forgot to pick this little gem. Notsri can't or won't answer this. Maybe you will.

Let me know!

Amaleq13

Everybody needs to tone down the "mud-slinging" in this discussion and focus more upon making rational arguments based on the evidence. It should not be necessary to give such a warning twice.

Thanks in advance,


Amaleq13, BC&H moderator